Theos-Talk Archives (October 2004 Message tt00190)

Thursday, October 7, 2004

Dear Jerry:

All you say may be quite true.  

This does not obviate the fact that in my opinion it is a fabrication -- a
construct designed to seem authoritative, and, in a way it will, like other
attempts, try to subvert the THEOSOPHICAL MOVEMENT.

None of those conclusions can be made to stick in India. Out here, far
away, we have little basis to compare or to criticize (other than the
literature -- the books and letters -- themselves). Have you, or has anyone
asked anyone in the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY in India to give an opinion? They
may probably not, as the subject of the Mahatmas is sacred to every Indian.
And not to be discussed with "strangers." But if there have been, answers I
would welcome them.

In my opinion the subject of the Masters and Their Work is too noble, and
valuable for anyone to deride, or attempt to belittle it. It also demeans
Them, Their work and Their sacrifices -- and that, above all, I object to.

Anyone who reads the MAHATMA LETTERS with the piercing intelligence of a
devoted student will soon realize that what I say is quite accurate.  

"There is no religion higher than TRUTH." 

Yes, that was, and is the only "party-line." 

THEOSOPHY stands for universality -- no parties, and the THEOSOPHICAL
SOCIETY was commenced to establish a nucleus of Universal Brotherhood, not
to destroy it, or stand passively by and let others do that. It is up to the
"members" (whether 'attached' or 'detached') to exercise their free-willed
independence and decide whether they will continue in passivity, or seize
the golden moment and discover for themselves what is the truth of things. 

After all, why depend on anyone for unverified statements? In this case the
evidence lies before everyone: the MAHATMA LETTERS, the SECRET DOCTRINE,
and ISIS UNVEILED.

No compromise is possible between the arguments of the "Lower Mind," and
those of Buddhi-Manas - the vehicle of the divine, Spiritual Higher Self in
each of us. But who takes THEOSOPHY seriously?  

Who has any respect for Those Immortal Slaves to Wisdom and to KARMA, who
cherish the title of "Servants of Humanity," and who, aeon after aeon, seek
patiently, by all legitimate means to get mankind to learn how to think,
and be accurate and honest in everyday life to their inner "God," the Higher
Self?

The very idea that there are eternal, immortal MONADS, who, like the very
atoms and sub-atoms of our "Science," exist, become intelligent, and over
the tremendous periods of time necessary, have achieved a perfection of
vision, and a comprehension of the most recondite aspects of the common
basic urge that unites and moves the entire Universe -- that is what the
Maters of Wisdom, and the Mahatmas stand for in my humble view. Therefore I
protest. 

Do our academicians, as a group, stand on their own integrity and
independence for that? Like most highly intelligent minds they are adepts at
focusing on their own specialties. But the whole is vaster. Tearing apart
statements made and evidence advanced is useful when dealing with false
notions. But to what end? To construct and build a better human bond of
brotherhood? Or, to destroy that? 

Look around. It is the service of our World, solar-System and Universe to
us that keeps us alive with the vast currents of life-force and the
continual exchange of life-atoms -- something we do not yet know the laws
of. There is in all Nature to be seen a continual give and take without any
demand for reward or recognition. What kind of Overseers mange this? Do a
few individuals treading the ancient dust of the "Five Rivers" -- the
Punjab, do this? And they do not commonly speak Tamil or Telugu in the
Punjab!

That anyone dares to turn the Masters of Wisdom into trivial individuals of
perhaps unblemished but ordinary lives is ridiculous and demands protest.
The characters selected do not agree with the depictions made clear and
inherent in the MAHATMA LETTERS.
 
I don't care a fig for the academic opinion of these things as it has not
yet developed, even in a few that I can discern, the capacity to envisage
ultimates and the metaphysics of that brotherhood that is rooted in all of
us (as the immortal Monads -- the Eternal Pilgrims) without any exception.
And if it has, where are the bold ones who sacrifice their "positions" to
advance such views as these? 

One may say that the writings of the Mahatmas (as in MAHATMA LETTERS), and
the works they claim to be partly authored by them and H. P. Blavatsky:
(ISIS UNVEILED and The SECRET DOCTRINE ) -- stand upon their own basis as
invulnerable monuments. And if this sounds too fulsome, then let it be
clearly understood that in years to come those monuments will continue to
stand, and will serve future generations to overcome all carping critics,
and attempts to demean them.

Best wishes, and always in friendship,

Dallas

======================================
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Hejka-Ekins 
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 4:26 PM
To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: Cayce's relevance to Theosophy/theosophy


Dallas,

Your lifetime of study in the Theosophical Movement and devotion to 
HPB's teaching has brought you an awesome font of knowledge and insight 
into the teachings. However, may I intercede and say something on 
behalf of Paul Johnson's The Masters Revealed? I read the book when it 
first came out and published a review on the same in New Perspectives. 

While I did not agree with Paul's conclusions concerning the identity 
of the Masters, and found his methodology very troubling, I still gave 
it a positive review. Why? Because he did something that no one else 
had done. He succeeded in publishing a peer reviewed book at a 
university press on a subject that has never before been seriously 
explored in academic circles. That is an accomplishment that many a 
professor seeking publication credits for tenure would envy.  

What is important for the Theosophical Movement, is that the book 
has consequently and necessarily become a primary reference for every 
subsequent peer reviewed paper which has come out sense. Is Paul's book 
the last word on the subject? Of course not. Sooner or later, new works 
will come out which will do further research and advance the scholarship 
on the subject.  

May I conclude in saying that what Paul accomplished is deserving of 
a great deal of respect, and is a positive step in the direction of  
bringing the subject of the Masters into the arena of academic debate. 
No doubt subsequent scholarship will unveil new facts and come to 
conclusions which are very different from the Theosophical party-line.  
That is desirable, and I submit, ought to be welcomed by everyone who 
calls themselves a "Theosophist"--if they are to take seriously HPB's 
phrase that Theosophy is the search for truth. Ideally, scholarship is 
an ongoing dialogue, not a vying of axiomatic assertions.

In warm friendship
Jerry

=========================================